Vioxx trial to proceed.

Interesting news on the Vioxx front today. The judge in the Texas case refused to delay jury selection.

Merck had wanted to push things off after the Attorney General for the State of Texas recently filed suit against Merck on behalf of the state. It makes for interesting reading.

What makes this relevant for the Settlement Channel audience is there will be NO settlements on Vioxx unless or until Merck loses a few cases in court. They have decided to fight these, one case at a time, which I can certainly understand from a strategic stand point as they have almost nothing to lose in the big picture and almost everything to gain. If they win, the value of settlements drop, and at the very worst it buys them time to build up the settlement war chest it will take to resolve these. If they lose, they can still fight a few more single cases before having to make an attempt at a global settlement strategy.

This is high stakes poker and it will be fascinating to see how Attorney Mark Lanier fares against the big guns Merck rolls out against him. They were already successful in pushing the Alabama trial back, and again, delay is their friend as the longer they go the more the "bad news" of Vioxx fades from the publics perception.  We will keep you informed both her and over at The Legal Broadcast Network page.  with our expert commentary and interviews with lawyers right there on the scene.

Comments

[Wayne]

It seems to me that until a few VIOXX trials are concluded we will not know how causation will be determined by juries. The signature for VIOXX damages would appear to be far weaker than for say, Fen-Phen, the diet drug cocktail. In the Fen-Phen situation the damages had a rather clear cut signature - Valvular Heart Disease (VHD) and Primary Pulmonary Hypertenion (PPH). While it is true that certain health problems are associated with obesity, heart value damage and Primary Pulmonary Hypertension are not among them. It was relatively easy for juries to see the causation between Fen-Phen and VHD or PPH.

The damages associated with VIOXX are rather common and well know to the average person heart attack, stroke etc. Eliminating the other possible factors that may have caused or contributed to the plaintiff's health problems may prove to be very tricky at trial. It would seem that each case is likely to be a battle of experts.

The potential for VIOXX to be a blockbuster mass torts case is clear, but until several trails have been concluded, it is unclear what the potential liability really is.